Talk:Romance (Luis Miguel album)/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 16:34, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Will have this done within 48 hours. From a first glance, though, it doesn't appear to need that much work! ☠ Jag  uar  ☠ 16:34, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm looking forward to it and I have Miniapolis to thank for copy-editing the prose! Erick (talk) 16:59, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. Has an appropriate reference section:
 * B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

Initial comments

 * It is worth noting that the prose in this article is one of the best I've ever reviewed, through reading it I have found almost no problems with the way it's written! Almost pure GA material.
 * "in August 1991 at Ocean Way Recording in Hollywood, California" - I would link Hollywood, for accessibility to readers


 * "and the bestselling record in Argentina by a non-native artist" - the first?
 * According to Billboard, it's the best selling album by a foreign artist in the country.


 * "The third single, "Contigo en la Distancia", was released in Mexico in July 1992[25]" - ref should be at the end of the sentence


 * "In Mexico it was certified octuple platinum by AMPROFON" - it would be best to explain what AMPROFON is to unfamiliar readers


 * In the Commercial performance section, do you have any information on how the album sold outside the US and Latin America? The reception section states that "Romance and Segundo Romance have also been successful in non-Spanish-speaking countries, such as Finland and Saudi Arabia"
 * Honestly I haven't. I was thinking one of two possible actions: 1) remove it since I'm trying to push this towards FA and play it safe or 2) State "according to Achy Obejas, [insert quote here from the album]". Which would you prefer? Erick (talk) 19:09, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Option one sounds like a great idea, if you're aiming for FA! ☠ Jag  uar  ☠ 19:50, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

On hold
I have to admit, this article is nearly flawless. The only concerns I found are only technical and somewhat minor. I am also participating in the GA Cup, so I have to wait until all problems are addressed by the nominator (otherwise I would have probably passed it)! The references are all in check, the prose is well-written and the images are also fine. I'll put this on hold for seven days, but truth be told it doesn't need that long! Once all of those issues have been addressed it should pass. ☠ Jag  uar  ☠ 16:03, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Close - promoted
As expected, not much work here was needed to bring this up to GA, in fact this is already on the road to becoming a Featured Article. Thanks for addressing those points so swiftly, I'd recommend to remove what was discussed (if you prefer) as this article is already looking like FA material. In short, it is well written, well referenced and everything else meets the GA criteria. Well done! ☠ Jag  uar  ☠ 19:52, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 * And thank you for your kind comments and for taking your time to review this article! Erick (talk) 22:35, 2 December 2014 (UTC)